MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132246307 · doi:10.1109/aiccsa.2009.5069452

FPGA-driven pseudorandom number generators aimed at accelerating Monte Carlo methods

2009· article· en· W2132246307 on OpenAlexaff
Tarek Ould‐Bachir, Jean‐Jules Brault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicChaos-based Image/Signal Encryption
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPseudorandom number generatorField-programmable gate arrayRandom number generationComputer scienceMonte Carlo methodContext (archaeology)Generator (circuit theory)AccelerationHardware accelerationRandom variateGate arrayPseudorandom generator theoremParallel computingAlgorithmComputer hardwarePseudorandom generatorMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hardware acceleration in High Performance Computing (HPC) context is of growing interest, particularly in the field of Monte Carlo methods where the resort to Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) technology has been proven as an effective media, capable of enhancing by several orders the speed execution of stochastic processes. The spread-use of reconfigurable hardware for stochastic simulation gathered a significant effort towards effective implementations of hardware pseudorandom numbers generators (PRNGs) - these generators needed to exhibit a statistically proven random behaviour and to be charactarized by a very long period. In this paper we present the state of the art of hardware pseudorandom number generation in the context of Monte Carlo acceleration. We highlight the emerging trends over the most recent publications and suggest some insights on the forthcoming works. Furthermore, we provide a complete hardware description of a new gaussian variate generator (GVG) and an exponential variate generator (EVG) based on a decision-tree technique of ours, herein presented as well. The prototypes implemented on a Xilinx Virtex II Pro XC2VP100 FPGA occupy from 150 to 417 slices and reach 280 MHz, while exhibiting good statistical behaviours with high p-values on the x2test and offering a unitary Knuth ratio.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChaos-based Image/Signal EncryptionFrench-language works237,207